Graphene OS might be amazing for all I know, but only supporting Google hardware makes it a joke in the real world outside of the Google fanboy bubble.
You should probably read about the subject a bit more before sharing your opinions on this.
People install GrapheneOS because they are NOT fans of Google. The Pixel is simply the only phone with the hardware to support a secure, non-Google OS.
As for deleting all the content of your phone, what makes you think that border security or law enforcement won’t access your data directly from your backup on Google’s cloud?
I don’t know anyone who takes the effort to install an aggressively de-Googled OS and then uses Google cloud services.
I can see how there would appear to be irony if someone doesn’t distinguish software from hardware.
You don’t need Google software to use a Pixel and Google’s software is the privacy/security concern. Their hardware isn’t bad and it has unique features that make it the best consumer device for security.
I won’t buy an ATV from Yamaha, but I would buy a Yamaha Saxophone. Because they’re two completely distinct things, made by completely different groups of people despite being under the same company name.
Technically only the kernel is Linux, but the userspace is all Google!
Okay technically technically it’s a modified kernel, and I’m sure there are plenty of parts of userspace that Google just imported without modification.
The separation between software and hardware is not nearly as distinct as your comment suggests. Beyond (sometimes replaceable) firmware there’s microcode and embedded systems with their own software inside modules like the modem that allows your phone to actually talk to the network.
Those things are technically true but largely irrelevant.
The concern about Google’s software is that the software that they produce which is targeted at consumers binds the user with a restrictive TOS which allows them access to all of your personal data. Their Play Services gives Google very low level access to the operating system and their cloud services are being constantly enshittified.
So I avoid that software and those services.
That doesn’t mean that every piece of software that Google produces is implicated. The teams writing low level firmware for optical fingerprint readers are not the ones developing consumer spyware.
I’m concerned about security, I’m not an anti-Google zealot.
I don’t WANT to support Google, but unfortunately their hardware is superior for this purpose.
The GrapheneOS devs have a public list of hardware requirements for any manufacturer that wants to support real security, so far only the Pixel checks all the boxes
You should probably read about the subject a bit more before sharing your opinions on this.
People install GrapheneOS because they are NOT fans of Google. The Pixel is simply the only phone with the hardware to support a secure, non-Google OS.
I don’t know anyone who takes the effort to install an aggressively de-Googled OS and then uses Google cloud services.
Do you see the irony associated with buying hardware from the same company who’s software you actively want to remove?
I can see how there would appear to be irony if someone doesn’t distinguish software from hardware.
You don’t need Google software to use a Pixel and Google’s software is the privacy/security concern. Their hardware isn’t bad and it has unique features that make it the best consumer device for security.
I won’t buy an ATV from Yamaha, but I would buy a Yamaha Saxophone. Because they’re two completely distinct things, made by completely different groups of people despite being under the same company name.
Technically all Android is Google software but yeah
It’s all Linux software, technically
Technically only the kernel is Linux, but the userspace is all Google!
Okay technically technically it’s a modified kernel, and I’m sure there are plenty of parts of userspace that Google just imported without modification.
Software is complicated.
The separation between software and hardware is not nearly as distinct as your comment suggests. Beyond (sometimes replaceable) firmware there’s microcode and embedded systems with their own software inside modules like the modem that allows your phone to actually talk to the network.
Those things are technically true but largely irrelevant.
The concern about Google’s software is that the software that they produce which is targeted at consumers binds the user with a restrictive TOS which allows them access to all of your personal data. Their Play Services gives Google very low level access to the operating system and their cloud services are being constantly enshittified.
So I avoid that software and those services.
That doesn’t mean that every piece of software that Google produces is implicated. The teams writing low level firmware for optical fingerprint readers are not the ones developing consumer spyware.
I’m concerned about security, I’m not an anti-Google zealot.
That said, I personally would love to see the day that fairphone or another company is able to support graphene.
Oh definitely.
I don’t WANT to support Google, but unfortunately their hardware is superior for this purpose.
The GrapheneOS devs have a public list of hardware requirements for any manufacturer that wants to support real security, so far only the Pixel checks all the boxes